Christopher King has worked in residential and corporate real estate in various capacities for the past fifteen years, clearing title, filing zoning applications and reviewing wireless tower contracts. He and his associates are now teaming to provide video coverage of America's imploding Mortgage market.
All images video and text subject to copyright.

There is a hearing coming up as early as 30 April, 2013 in a crazy case in which Thomas P. Dore was dismissed even though the Case was on appeal and there was no jurisdiction. Dore has, on prior occasion, admitted Under Oath that he had no firsthand knowledge of anything material necessary to foreclose in the case. Moreover, as you will see, there is empirical evidence that Maryland Courts are not giving homeowners the respect and protection to which they are entitled per Emergency Rule 14-207.1. The rule requires that full and fair hearings are supposed to be conducted when there are issues raised regarding Holder in Due Course, Real Party in Interest and Standing to Foreclosure. However, in reality, whenever Thomas P. Dore is involved, the rules are suspended, even though he is the one that should be suspended from practice because he was TWICE reprimanded for issuing false, fraudulent and/or forged signatures in foreclosure cases. As such, Circuit Judge King's December, 2012 ruling admonishing Thomas P. Dore (Mortgage Movies short film) was incomplete. Watch for new short films and courtoom video in the coming weeks, I know from prior experience (watch the movie below) that the Maryland Courts will be following every step of the way, and Daily Record writer Steve Lash had best take note. Here's a Daily Record story on Rule 14-207.1. Writes Lash:

The new rule, which takes effect immediately, allows circuit courts to appoint independent lawyers to review foreclosure documents for problems. If a problem with the lender’s paperwork is detected, it has 30 days to show — at its own expense — why the foreclosure should not be dismissed. Judges may also summon lawyers and notaries public into court when the authenticity of a signature or the veracity of an attestation to the accuracy of a document’s contents is in question.

While the changes may seem far-reaching, retired Judge Alan M. Wilner, head of the committee that drafted the new rule and presented it to the Court of Appeals, said the rule simply consolidates existing powers. Judges have “the inherent authority” to require attorneys to answer questions regarding their affidavits and to “show cause” why a case, including a foreclosure action, should not be dismissed, he told the court.

I will be discussing this case again on OneRadioNetwork where I a guest speaker yesterday, and Judge Wilner -- MD Bar Judge of the Year and author of the report I excerpted above in the second thumbnail-- will no doubt be interested!

Thursday, April 18, 2013

So much for "Proudly servicing the needs of mortgage lenders in the West."Deadly Clear reports on Beaton v. J.P. Morgan and NWTS here: “To the extent that Chase acquired Beaton’s loan in 2008 before she defaulted, it falls within the section 1692a(6)(F) exemption of “debt collector.” NWTS was appointed as successor trustee on November 29, 2010. However, Beaton had been in default since approximately July 1, 2010. Accordingly, NWTS does not fall within the same exemption. Beaton alleges that the identity of the “Note Bearer/Creditor remains unknown[,]” that it remains undetermined if Chase is the actual beneficiary pursuant to RCW 61.24.005(2), and that NWTS violated FDCPA and damaged the Plaintiff by foreclosing her property.Liberally construed, the court finds that Beaton has plausibly alleged that NWTS attempted to collect on a debt that may not have been owed to Chase, which may have violated the FDCPA. See McDonald II, 2013 WL 858178 at *12 (“At the time [NWTS began the foreclosure process], NWTS had not been appointed successor trustee and was not acting on behalf of the entity that had actual physical possession of the note: it therefore lacked the right to effect dispossession of plaintiff’s property. Plaintiff has established that NWTS violated § 1692f(6)(A) of the FDCPA.”); Michelson v. Chase Home Finance, LLC, Case No. C11-1445MJP, 2012 WL 3240241, *5 (W.D. Wash. Aug. 7, 2012) (“NWTS and RCO may have violated the FDCPA because they did not yet have confirmation of Chase’s right to possess the property, and thus may have violated § 1692f(6)(A)”).I added McDonald v. Onewest Bank et al. 2013 Lexis 31730 (W.D. Washington March 7, 2013), which I will upload to SCRIBD:CONCLUSION
For all of the foregoing reasons, defendants' motion for summary judgment (Dkt. # 172) and plaintiff's cross motion (Dkt. # 176) are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Defendants are hereby enjoined from proceeding with any foreclosure procedure based on the January 12, 2010, notice of [*48] default.

With all the hubub over the Good Dr. Salomon Melgen I figured we could take time to study the Good Senator on other matters.As noted in the video, Senator Menendez talks a mean talk but he has not proved to many of us that he walks the mean walk. Observe the dichotomy between his get tough stance on the Senate Floor and his benevolent despotism when called to answer to media or homeowners who have been victimized by the very banks and lawyers he portends to go after. And when I say victimized, I mean having Phelan, Hallinan & Schmieg call the police on an innocent homeowner, at which point the Good Senator's junior assistant tell us that the Senator will welcome our report. Read the back story here and here.

We gave him a report, and his senior aide Betsy Gilligan basically told us to go to hell, despite receiving correspondence from a NJ homeowners' group in our favor. Given what my camera looked like at the end of that hallway we damn well could have been shot, and apparently that would have been preferable to the cops befriending us and making it out alive as the lead officer called Phelan, Hallinan & Schmieg and said "We have two gentlemen out here and we don't know what the fuck is going on because no one is answering the door."

Watch the movie and wait for the links to the new (reiterated) FOIA request and the letter from two U.S. War Veterans who wrote Senator Menendez to no avail. He did, however send them a request for campaign contributions, ahem.